1. Do you think Chan lacks a significant audience connection? Any more so than Abbott, Kozuka, etc? He's not a natural showman (certainly not on par with Takahashi, or even Joubert), but I think he and his programs are quite effective in that regard (I think this will be more apparent if he nails the LP).

Could you please go back to the original post that I have responded to? I was refering to what Poodlepal said.:sheesh:

I agree with you on this. To me, Chan does have connections with the audience but his performance was just that. It was not on the par with Takahashi and Joubert. I actually think that Joubert did better than Takahashi this time. I don't see anything from Chan should be better than Joubert in PCS except TR. In SS, his spin might be better but Joubert did a perfect 4-3 (the only one in the top 6 skaters). So their SS should be at least even or Joubert's higher.

Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue

2. Do you think Chan is only about "deep edges?" If that were true, he wouldn't be any more successful than Laura Lepisto - a medal contender in a poor field, but under the top five when perfect. Obviously, that's not the case. I mean he gets high levels on footwork and spins (or do you think difficult spins and footwork aren't integral to figure skating?), does a full array of triples (which is admittedly the bare minimum for men, but still) and has programs that are so technically difficult, despite the lack of a quad. There's a reason he can compete with the ebst of the field, and that's why. It seems to me that your comment disregards everything he does well (which is just as reductive as the "figure jumping/ice jumping comments, or the people who disregard Joubert because of his physical attractiveness)

Again, you took my post out of context! Mister!

No, Chan's skating is not all about the deep edges, BUT his deep edge seems to have covered everything in judges' mind and in many Chan's fans' mind, and been hyped as the next best thing, or rather the best thing in the world right now. He has deep edges in his skating better than most of the male skaters. That's it, and that's all. Too much emphasize on the edges. That is not right! That is not all the men's skating about. He is competitive in his skating. However, does he have the best spin in the world? Does he have the best jump in the world? (Goodness, he is struggling with his 3A a lot of the times.) His footwork is one of the best in the world but is not THE best. His program is definitely not the best. It's just an average in the top 6 skaters. He didn't go all the way out in his performance. So he is over scored. Period!

There are two types of performing artists. One goes after the audience with virtuosity; and the other draws the audience into his world of performing. Both are valid, but I doubt all judges would be aware of that.

No, Chan's skating is not all about the deep edges, BUT his deep edge seems to have covered everything in judges' mind and in many Chan's fans' mind, and been hyped as the next best thing, or rather the best thing in the world right now. He has deep edges in his skating better than most of the male skaters. That's it, and that's all. Too much emphasize on the edges. That is not right! That is not all the men's skating about. He is competitive in his skating. However, does he have the best spin in the world? Does he have the best jump in the world? (Goodness, he is struggling with his 3A a lot of the times.) His footwork is one of the best in the world but is not THE best. His program is definitely not the best. It's just an average in the top 6 skaters. He didn't go all the way out in his performance. So he is over scored. Period!

Spoken like a true Joubot !

Anyone watching can see how much more Patrick is doing - that doesn't mean you have to be his fan - but his SP is just loaded with CH, TR and IN. His skating - when he is on and landing jumps is clearly superior. It is the skating of the future. Joubert and Plushy - even Johnny - are 6.0 skaters. Nothing wrong with that - but I can't imagine how anybody who watches Chan - and understands CoP - even a little bit - can't see that his style is just better than most of the other skaters.

Perhaps Patrick will consider doing a little less - and add a pelvic thrust or two - maybe the few pointing fingers so more fans can understand what he is doing. His skating is by far the most intricate, his bladework the best and his overall package is the most sophisticated.

Tara said what Joesitz said.
About the quad-triple is 4.3 higher than a flip triple combo, it's not enough because 4.3 does not reflect how much harder it is to add one more revolution in the air. The reward is not enough. Real skaters all said it. Michael Weiss, Kristi Yamaguchi, Peter Carruthers, Tara Lipinski, Johnny Weir. I would imagine real skaters know how hard it is to add one more revolution in the air compare to fans sitting at home saying 4.3 is perfectly enough. There are people who regularly do triples said the base value for quad is too low, and then there are people who couldn't do single toe and think adding another revolution is only worth so and so. Seriously? janetfan, seriously? =)

Tara said what Joesitz said.
About the quad-triple is 4.3 higher than a flip triple combo, it's not enough because 4.3 does not reflect how much harder it is to add one more revolution in the air. The reward is not enough. Real skaters all said it. Michael Weiss, Kristi Yamaguchi, Peter Carruthers, Tara Lipinski, Johnny Weir. I would imagine real skaters know how hard it is to add one more revolution in the air compare to fans sitting at home saying 4.3 is perfectly enough. There are people who regularly do triples said the base value for quad is too low, and then there are people who couldn't do single toe and think adding another revolution is only worth so and so. Seriously? janetfan, seriously? =)

Yea - seriously - 35% of Jouberts TES came from one jumping pass. Did he do anything else that was as good as Dai or Patrick? For that matter his jumps are sort of muscled like Plushy's (and Rachaels) --not such good landings and no real flow out of them.

I thought Jouby skated very well yesterday. It is the best he can do - but I agree with the judges - that others did a little better.

Where Joubert gets these high TR, CH and IN marks from is a mystery. Is bopping to techno music even to be compared with what some of the others are doing?

If your taste runs that way then that is fine. It is subjective. My taste runs a different way.
Basically, the three guys are pretty close and the best skate in the LP will be the determining factor.

If we make a quad worth say - 50% of the TES in the SP - will that still be considered "figure skating?" I think it would be something else.......

In SS, his spin might be better but Joubert did a perfect 4-3 (the only one in the top 6 skaters). So their SS should be at least even or Joubert's higher.

The SS part of the component marks has absolutely nothing to do with the individual elements marked in the TES scores. So comparing Chan's spins and Jouberts Quad is meaningless in this context. Below is the definition and criteria for SS from the ISU site and IMO Joubert shouldn't even be close to Chan in this category.

Skating Skills
Definition: Over all skating quality: edge control and flow over the ice surface demonstrated by a
command of the skating vocabulary (edges, steps, turns, etc), the clarity of technique, and the use of
effortless power to accelerate and vary speed.
Criteria:
Balance, rhythmic knee action, and precision of foot placement
Flow and effortless glide
Rhythm, strength, clean strokes, and an efficient use of lean create a steady run to the
blade and an ease of transfer of weight resulting in seemingly effortless power and
acceleration.
Cleanness and sureness of deep edges, steps, and turns
The skater should demonstrate clean and controlled curves, deep edges, and steps.
Varied use of power/energy, speed, and acceleration
Variety is the gradation – some of which may be subtle
Multi directional skating
Includes all direction of skating: forward and backward, clockwise and
counterclockwise including rotation in both directions.
Mastery of one foot skating
No over use of skating on two feet.
Pair Skating and Ice Dancing: Equal mastery of technique by both partners shown in unison.
Ice Dancing: Compulsory Dance – Ice Coverage

The SS part of the component marks has absolutely nothing to do with the individual elements marked in the TES scores. So comparing Chan's spins and Jouberts Quad is meaningless in this context. Below is the definition and criteria for SS from the ISU site and IMO Joubert shouldn't even be close to Chan in this category.

Skating Skills
Definition: Over all skating quality: edge control and flow over the ice surface demonstrated by a
command of the skating vocabulary (edges, steps, turns, etc), the clarity of technique, and the use of
effortless power to accelerate and vary speed.
Criteria:
Balance, rhythmic knee action, and precision of foot placement
Flow and effortless glide
Rhythm, strength, clean strokes, and an efficient use of lean create a steady run to the
blade and an ease of transfer of weight resulting in seemingly effortless power and
acceleration.
Cleanness and sureness of deep edges, steps, and turns
The skater should demonstrate clean and controlled curves, deep edges, and steps.
Varied use of power/energy, speed, and acceleration
Variety is the gradation – some of which may be subtle
Multi directional skating
Includes all direction of skating: forward and backward, clockwise and
counterclockwise including rotation in both directions.
Mastery of one foot skating
No over use of skating on two feet.
Pair Skating and Ice Dancing: Equal mastery of technique by both partners shown in unison.
Ice Dancing: Compulsory Dance – Ice Coverage

ITA. I watched both programs back/to/back last night a few times - Chan to Joubert and vice versa. Did some stop action and slow-motion comparisons. Chan is simply more intricate and more "polished" in his edges and skating skills. Could Joubert be better if he wasn't going after the bigger jumps? Perhaps. The bigger jumps do mean less transitions and more setup. Because Chan isn't doing the bigger jumps, he can fit in more transitions and demonstrate more skating skills. Thus, Joubert deserves the bigger points on the Technical side, and Chan the bigger points on the skills side, because each is putting a different component of skating on the ice. What will be interesting is to see if Chan's skating skill scores decline if he includes a Quad in his programs, or, if he's able to put the same level of skills on the ice while still accomodating for the physical requirements of the bigger jumps. Then, we'll be comparing apples to apples with the two.

Tara said what Joesitz said.
About the quad-triple is 4.3 higher than a flip triple combo, it's not enough because 4.3 does not reflect how much harder it is to add one more revolution in the air. The reward is not enough. Real skaters all said it. Michael Weiss, Kristi Yamaguchi, Peter Carruthers, Tara Lipinski, Johnny Weir. I would imagine real skaters know how hard it is to add one more revolution in the air compare to fans sitting at home saying 4.3 is perfectly enough. There are people who regularly do triples said the base value for quad is too low, and then there are people who couldn't do single toe and think adding another revolution is only worth so and so. Seriously? janetfan, seriously? =)

I think you added way too many names on that list, some of the quoted skaters will probably object you misconstruct their statements. Furthermore, none of them have specifically said 4.3 of difference is not large enough, ever. In fact, I don't think any of them bother to calculate it out and see. It's very different when you say something based on how you feel and when you actually write it out and reflect. I often formulate a different opinion between just calling it based on my gut feeling vs. when I actually sit down and write it out and calculate something. Besides, the points table aren't exactly determined by some whimp either. The point table established by ISU is obviously the products of experts in this field, many of which are experienced former skaters who are much more senior than any of the said skaters you quoted. I know one ISU judge who was involved in the IJS project last skated in the 1970's. The 4.3 of difference is most definitely not something that casual fans come up with, I think you completely mischaracterize what it is. Besides, the value of Quad has already been revised up once so and may yet change again. The point is it's hard to strike a fine balance and this is by no means an easy task to do. But I have no reason to doubt the point difference, whatever it is, is the work of very knowledgeable and experienced people in figure skating. And this obviously includes more than just a few big names that you see on TV, who should I say, sometimes don't seem to know what they are talking about and more into looking good than anything else, without naming names.

I think you added way too many names on that list, some of the quoted skaters will probably object you misconstruct their statements. Furthermore, none of them have specifically said 4.3 of difference is not large enough, ever. In fact, I don't think any of them bother to calculate it out and see. It's very different when you say something based on how you feel and when you actually write it out and reflect. I often formulate a different opinion between just calling it based on my gut feeling vs. when I actually sit down and write it out and calculate something. Besides, the points table aren't exactly determined by some whimp either. The point table established by ISU is obviously the products of experts in this field, many of which are experienced former skaters who are much more senior than any of the said skaters you quoted. I know one ISU judge who was involved in the IJS project last skated in the 1970's. The 4.3 of difference is most definitely not something that casual fans come up with, I think you completely mischaracterize what it is. Besides, the value of Quad has already been revised up once so and may yet change again. The point is it's hard to strike a fine balance and this is by no means an easy task to do. But I have no reason to doubt the point difference, whatever it is, is the work of very knowledgeable and experienced people in figure skating. And this obviously includes more than just a few big names that you see on TV, who should I say, sometimes don't seem to know what they are talking about and more into looking good than anything else, without naming names.

Are you serious?
Terry asked a panel of skaters during the Olympics.
Terry: Do you think the base value of the quad should be higher?
Kristi: Yes
Peter: Yes
Michael Weiss: Yes

Yesterday, Peter asked the same question
Tara: Yes
Johnny: Yes.

A simple yes is a simple yes. They all said the base should be worth more. Currently it's 4.3. So obviously the difference 4.3 is NOT enough.

I added way too many names to that list? You think I just made up these things? Anyone who has Universal Sports and watched these segment can back me up.

Are you serious?
Terry asked a panel of skaters during the Olympics.
Terry: Do you think the base value of the quad should be higher?
Kristi: Yes
Peter: Yes
Michael Weiss: Yes

Yesterday, Peter asked the same question
Tara: Yes
Johnny: Yes.

A simple yes is a simple yes. They all said the base should be worth more. Currently it's 4.3. So obviously the difference 4.3 is NOT enough.

I added way too many names to that list? You think I just made up these things? Anyone who has Universal Sports and watched these segment can back me up.

One of the reasons the quad value is the way it is was so that an AMERICAN skater aka the "quad king" would not win simply because he was the BEST quad jumper.

Thinking to the futue - do we want to see a skater lacking in many qualities but who is a terrific quad jumper be considered the best male skater?

If you say yes - then you are suggesting that it was Tim Goebel, aka the "Quad King" who should have won the OGM in 2002.

Now doesn't that sound riidiculous - perhaps bordering on stupidity? Of course Yags was the best in 2002.
I can see we have different viewpoints - as you think Rachael is the best Lady skater. Many others disagree. Even if Rachael did a 3A or a quad - she still would not be the best all around Lady skater. Skating - as determined by experts - is about more than one element.

What part of this don't you get?

It does make me think about the "barrel jumping" competition though. As Joe said - no music and let's just see who has the best jumps.......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z

One of the reasons the quad value is the way it is was so that an AMERICAN skater aka the "quad king" would not win simply because he was the BEST quad jumper.

Thinking to the futue - do we want to see a skater lacking in many qualities but who is a terrific quad jumper be considered the best male skater?

If you say yes - then you are suggesting that it was Tim Goebel, aka the "Quad King" who should have won the OGM in 2002.

Now doesn't that sound riidiculous - perhaps bordering on stupidity? Of course Yags was the best in 2002.
I can see we have different viewpoints - as you think Rachael is the best Lady skater. Many others disagree. Even if Rachael did a 3A or a quad - she still would not be the best all around Lady skater. Skating - as determined by experts - is about more than one element.

You continue to miss the point. In 2002, Yag did 3 quads. One in the SP, 2 in the LP. Tim did 4. The point is the champion all did quads and more. Yag program was better and he had the quads. He won. Fair and square.
In 2010, people who backed down from technical difficulty, of course, had an easier time with the program. Real skaters said it takes a lot to prep for the quad, it takes a lot to refocus after the quad. The non-quad skaters benefit greatly from not doing the quad.

I don't think Rachael is the greatest. Do I think she's top 3 at the Olympics? No. Do I think she should be ahead of Mirai, Miki, Lepisto? Absolutely yes.

Quads are important and should be a required element so the judges can compare apple to apple. If you do a quad, see how much transition or choreography you can put in before the quad.

Anyone watching can see how much more Patrick is doing - that doesn't mean you have to be his fan - but his SP is just loaded with CH, TR and IN. His skating - when he is on and landing jumps is clearly superior.

ITA...I'm really not a fan of Chan winning this thing but Joubert has one element over Patrick and that's the quad. That's just not enough for me but that's just me.

I do think the quad should be worth more then maybe things can balance out and the judges can stop inflating Joubert and Plushenko's pcs scores.

You continue to miss the point. In 2002, Yag did 3 quads. One in the SP, 2 in the LP. Tim did 4. The point is the champion all did quads and more. Yag program was better and he had the quads. He won. Fair and square.
In 2010, people who backed down from technical difficulty, of course, had an easier time with the program. Real skaters said it takes a lot to prep for the quad, it takes a lot to refocus after the quad. The non-quad skaters benefit greatly from not doing the quad.

I don't think Rachael is the greatest. Do I think she's top 3 at the Olympics? No. Do I think she should be ahead of Mirai, Miki, Lepisto? Absolutely yes.

Quads are important and should be a required element so the judges can compare apple to apple. If you do a quad, see how much transition or choreography you can put in before the quad.

OK, fair enough - and if they change the rules to what you want - then we will see mandatory quads.

Until then - whether we like current CoP rules or not - that is the way skaters must be judged.

I think Joubert does a nice 4x3 and a few other decent jumps. I find every other aspect of his skating to be average at best.

Reading what Wally said - and others - a quad right now does not automatically mean a skater wins. Not to bring up Goebel again - but if one quad beats no quads - then you lose me in your logic coz it easily follows that 4 quads beat 3 quads.

OK- that is not what you are saying. But what are you saying? That one quad is enough to beat superior TR, CH, IN, spins and steps?